Identifying and supporting gifted and talented students

We have chosen to present vignettes of three research projects carried out by teachers that explored the identification of, as well as provision for, gifted and talented children. All three projects involved Key Stage 1 children. In general, the working definition for these projects was that gifted and talented children were children who showed significantly advanced abilities and skills in any domain. As the children involved were young, the teachers often looked for evidence of the promise of developing abilities.

One of the projects set out to identify the gifted and talented pupils through making enriched provision in the classroom and by offering cognitively challenging activities in order to make their gifts and talents come to light. Another considered the attributes of gifted and talented learners more generally and screened their classes for ‘intriguing’ children and possible underachieving gifted and talented learners using a published test that assessed the pupils’ well–being. A third project set out to find ways of enlisting and enhancing the support of parents in identifying gifted and talented pupils.

The projects’ identification processes fell into three broad categories:

• classroom observations
• notes from children’s conversations or conversations with children
• questionnaires for and interviews with parents.

Identifying gifted and talented EAL and hearing impaired pupils

Teachers in Hounslow designed mini enrichment projects to help them identify gifted and talented children who were also hearing impaired and/or spoke little English. The activities were devised in such a way that the requirement for spoken language was kept to a minimum and the children were allowed to work for as long as they needed over more than one session in the outdoor area. The activities included:

• the water challenge – the children were challenged to move water from one tray to another using gesture and simple verbal instructions. They were provided with a variety of containers, tubes and pipes
• the shelter challenge – the children were challenged through pictorial instruction to make a shelter for a bear that was big enough for the bear and themselves to fit into. They were provided with a range of structures (crates, boxes, tyres and fabrics) and joining equipment (pegs, tape, string, rope)
• the creative experience – to identify musical and creative talent, children listened to two contrasting pieces of music that were specially chosen for their strong rhythm, repetitive melody and low frequencies to make them more accessible to EAL and hearing impaired children. The children were provided with a range of media including decorator’s and classroom paintbrushes, felt tips, chalk, charcoal and crayons and lining paper to allow for freedom of creativity and working in groups.

The project team found that the specially designed activities helped them to identify gifted and talented children who were unable to speak fluently. The team noticed how the children showed enhanced confidence, a higher level of concentration and the ability to sustain interest in activities for longer periods. 

Identifying ‘intriguing’ children

Teachers at a school in Kent used a standard assessment tool to assess the children’s well-being and involvement. Data from one underachieving gifted and talented child for example, revealed:

• low levels of well–being
• low levels of involvement, although this varied across activities as he could concentrate for long periods on activities he liked, such as listening to stories
• challenging behaviour
• he could speak expressively on a range of subjects
• he was inquisitive – especially about insects – and was quick to notice changes to his environment
• he blocked out his paintings although his drawings were detailed
• he showed originality when making models
• he became unhappy if he was given insufficient time to finish an activity.

His teacher used the data to bring about changes in the classroom. For example, the classroom environment was enriched to provide interest tables and interactive displays. The child was supported to express his emotions and talk about his feelings. He was allowed time to engage in the activities he was interested in and to speak to an audience about them. His teacher scribed his stories for him so that he could concentrate on the compositional aspect of story telling, which was his strength. The changes to the learning environment had a positive effect:

• his levels of involvement increased and he became more curious about his environment
• his sense of well-being grew – he enjoyed the success he achieved in speaking to an audience
• his ability to compose stories exceeded that of his peers
• he set himself challenges and followed up ideas from teacher-directed work during child-initiated sessions
• his behaviour improved and he began to make friends.

Involving parents in identifying gifted and talented pupils

One project focused on enhancing the home-school relationship and engaging families. To begin with, Foundation Stage staff sent home a questionnaire, but a lack of response from parents prompted them to rethink their approach. They decided to modify the questionnaire and provide the parents with support in completing it. They held a parents’ meeting to explain to the parents how they carried out observations and how these helped them to recognise individual children’s specific interests and special gifts. The staff also talked to the parents about multiple intelligences and gave them a simple questionnaire to complete to help them to identify the ways in which they were ‘smart’. The parents found this useful and began to consider how their own child’s intelligences linked to the examples they had been given.

Thirteen out of a possible fourteen parents brought the completed questionnaire with them to their child’s first Foundation Stage profile meeting. Parents commented that it had encouraged them to take a step back and consider what their child’s play showed them about their child’s interests and understanding. Thinking about their child’s behaviours and patterns of play helped parents to identify their child’s special interests and thereby provide more appropriate activities in the home. Teachers then shared their observations of the children’s behaviours and patterns of play in school with the parents. The discussion helped all adults to see the ways in which the child was ‘smart’ and decide upon the next steps for the child’s development. 

Reference

These teacher-led projects were all reported in: Koshy, V., Mitchell, C., & Williams, M. (2006) Nurturing gifted and talented children at Key Stage 1. A report of 14 action research projects. DfES Research Report 741: www.dfes.gov.uk/research/programmeofresearch/projectinformation.cfm?projectid=14903&resultspage=1

We chose this case study because it shows how a school used an inclusive approach to enrich the learning of all pupils, including those identified as gifted and talented. After a series of discussion meetings with staff, governors and parents and a review of existing strategies, the school decided to introduce the ‘Thinking Actively in a Social Context’ (TASC) Framework through a series of cross–curricular projects each lasting half a term. Teachers collected case study evidence of increased motivation and attention and reduction of challenging behaviour, and portfolio evidence of students’ work. Staff found that TASC gave them an opportunity to personalise students’ learning, and develop their self-evaluation, problem-solving and thinking skills.

What did the TASC framework consist of?

The headteacher held a meeting for parents and governors to explain the rationale and purpose of the TASC Framework. It consisted of the following elements:

• Gather and organise – all projects were initially very broadly planned. Staff concentrated on developing the students’ questioning, research and enquiry skills, then negotiated with them the areas of the project they would develop in small groups. Teachers found that this ‘gather and organise’ stage was critical to personalising learning and avoiding repetition of knowledge and skills already mastered, a key activity if teachers are to create time and opportunity for covering new ground. They taught the children mindmapping skills to help them record their knowledge and skills quickly.
• Identify the task – staff discussed and guided the pupils in their selection of aspects of the project they wanted to pursue, and how they would evaluate the task, which gave the pupils ownership of the project. This provided teachers with the opportunity to set pupils appropriate levels of challenge and complexity.
• Generate – each class generated ideas about how they would tackle their particular tasks, how they would research and find out more, and what skills they needed.
• Decide and implement – pupils decided for themselves who they would work with and how they would share the tasks. They also planned the process and their final presentation.
• Evaluate and Communicate – at various stages the pupils presented their work to each other, and exchanged constructive appraisal and criticism. They also presented their work to other classes and to parents and governors.
• Learn from experience – the children reflected on their learning, consolidated new knowledge and skills and did their forward planning.

Parents and governors worked with the children on the projects. For example, they helped:

• Foundation Phase pupils design and create real and model foods for their café
• Key Stage 1 pupils design a town with roads and buildings, and then explore directions and angles using Roman technology
• Key Stage 2 pupils create and trial their own maths games focusing on the four rules of number.

What impact did TASC have on the school?

The school noted how the whole-school, structured approach to problem-solving led to:

• increased pupil motivation and reduced inappropriate behaviour
• greater practical, hands-on involvement of parents and governors
• increased co–ordination in lesson planning throughout the school, with more informed diagnostic awareness and discussion of pupils’ strengths, and greater flexibility in approaches to lesson planning so that the individual needs of all pupils could be addressed
• an improvement in pupils’ work, which was demonstrated in exhibitions and productions, where all pupils’ work was celebrated
• appropriate differentiation for pupils so that every pupil was enabled to take their learning further.

Following the success of the initial TASC Projects, the school applied the TASC process across the curriculum, and combined the problem-solving skills and strategies with a range of teaching skills, such as whole-class teaching and a variety of individual and group activities. Using the framework helped teachers to feel more confident about deciding how much support and intervention pupils needed, and allowing pupils to develop greater ownership of their learning. Staff commented on their increased enthusiasm, their joy in teamwork for planning and practice, and their professional satisfaction with their work. TASC also increased pupils’ confidence in undertaking individual and small group work. Pupils demonstrated greater responsibility for deciding aspects of a topic they wished to explore, took pride in their work, and enjoyed the opportunity to develop their own ideas.

Reference

Riches, P. & Wallace, B. (2006) Developing a policy of inclusion with differentiation. Using TASC: Thinking Actively in a Social Context. National Teacher Research Panel. Available from: www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ntrp/publications/

We chose this case study because it is an example of how coaching between students can be an effective strategy for raising achievement and it illustrates the types of negative student behaviours teachers took into account when identifying potentially able students. Gifted and talented students from Year 10 worked with 15 underachieving gifted and talented students from Year 8 to explore the reasons for their underachievement and support them in overcoming them. 

What does peer coaching involve and how is it different from mentoring?

Mentoring normally takes the form of a listening ear, where students are encouraged to talk about the obstacles to their learning, such as social pressures or social problems. It often involves discussion about the areas where the student is doing well and the areas where s/he is not doing well and this can lead to targets being set in order for the student to improve these weaker areas. Many schools have also introduced academic tutoring as part of their assessment processes whereby students meet with their tutor to review their attainment and effort across their subjects and set targets for improvement. The role of the peer coach is to identify learning needs and discuss possible learning strategies to meet these needs.

How did staff identify the able underachievers?

Lists used by schools often consist of purely positive characteristics of gifted and talented students, but some able students behave in a negative, apathetic or disruptive way. All staff were given training on the often negative behaviours associated with underachieving, such as:

• sparring or arguing with the teacher
• asking an excessive number of questions and/or posing deliberately awkward questions to the teacher
• saying brilliant things in oral discussions, but producing written work that shows lack of effort, care and pride
• being dependent on constant reassurance and encouragement, and
• choosing not to get involved in any activity during lessons.

How did the peer coaches investigate the causes of the younger students’ underachievement?

Each of the younger gifted and talented students was paired with an older gifted and talented student who had very good inter–personal skills. They met each other for 20 minutes per week throughout three terms to reflect on their learning needs and strategies. The coaches received training in how to listen and empower rather than to question, judge and fix. After one term of meetings where the Year 8 students had set the agenda and decided the issues, the team of coaches drew up a learning questionnaire based on the information the Year 8 students had already given in discussion. Questions included, for example, ‘What are your three most and least favourite types of work or activity in class?’ The coaches also logged the key points of discussion in their meetings on mentor cards.

What reasons for underachievement in gifted and talented students did the peer coaches find?

The reasons for underachieving given by the students included:

• lack of challenge in the classroom (commented on by 12 students)
• lack of study skills (10 students)
• a mismatch between teaching and learning styles (8 students)
• differences between teacher, parent and student expectations about levels of attainment (8 students)
• friendship issues (7 students)
• negative peer pressure (4 students).

The findings suggested that some researchers and teachers overemphasise the importance of negative peer attitudes to high ability – believing that able students sacrifice achievement in order to fit in socially. The most common complaint from the students was that learning activities in the classroom provided them with little choice about how to complete them – they were given few opportunities to be original, creative or develop their own ideas.

For example, one student underachieved in English and humanities more than in other subjects because she disliked having to complete lots of short, structured answers.  She preferred to write longer pieces that explored open–ended questions. Another student saw little point in making notes about the information that he had heard his teacher explain at the start of the lesson because he could remember it without writing it down. He felt he would gain more from discussing the topic in greater depth and complexity.

Situations such as these caused gifted students to disengage from learning or disrupt the learning of others in the class. Yet, more than half the students who were critical of the learning style they were expected to use at school, admitted to spending at least one hour a week working at home on their own projects, which related in some way to a subject at school, but which they had generated themselves and would never share with their teacher. This included a boy who had learnt to speak Elvish, a fantasy language based entirely on an alien alphabet, syntax and structure, yet who was placed in set 3 for French. This highlights the need to be careful about identifying able underachievers according to the amount of work that gets produced in class and by the way it has been presented.

When was peer coaching most successful as a method for tackling underachievement?

The peer coaches were effective at raising the younger students’ effort and attainment in the minority of cases where the student’s underachievement was due to friendship issues, wanting to fit in better socially, low self-esteem or fear of failure. But it was less effective where underachievement was due to lack of study skills, and lack of challenge in the classroom.

One reason why peer coaching was effective at overcoming friendship problems and negative peer pressure was that the coaches were chosen because they were both gifted and popular with their own peer group. Being connected with the 'in' set and the 'cool' people in school helped the younger students to gain status in the eyes of their own peer group. The coaches also helped the underachieving students gain a sense of perspective about the relationship problems that overshadowed their learning and introduced them to more mature ways of dealing with the teasing, labelling, jealousy and back-biting they sometimes faced.

Although the coaches passed on study skills and learning strategies to the Year 8 students, there was little improvement in their attainment because their teachers did not reinforce the skills and strategies during lessons. Similarly, the extent to which lessons challenged gifted students was beyond the control of the coaches.

Reference

Rule, B. (2006) Using peer coaches to explain and tackle the underachievement of gifted students. The National Academy for Gifted and talented Youth. Available from: www.nagty.ac.uk/research/practitioner_research/developing_expertise_awards_05_06.aspx

We chose this case study because it shows how teachers at one school set about providing an enrichment experience and how it helped to enhance the performance of a group of gifted boys. Teachers at a boys’ grammar school had noticed a disparity between gifted boys’ ability in maths and science subjects when compared with their ability in writing. They set out to investigate reasons for this gap as well as teaching and learning strategies that might help to bridge the gap.

The teachers selected 16 students (eight from Year 8 and eight from Year 10) who showed exceptional performance in maths or science, but much poorer performance in English (for example, predicted to achieve Level 8 in maths, but Level 6 in English). They interviewed the students to find out their attitudes to maths, science and English and found that the students particularly enjoyed the practical methods of teaching used by their science teachers. They arranged for a professional writer to help the students see writing as a practical and mathematical activity, during a week-long residential trip to France.

How did the students’ attitudes towards maths, science and English differ?

It was clear from the interviews that the students had a more positive outlook about science and maths than English. The teachers found that the students liked science because they enjoyed the practical and physical side of the subject. They also valued the subjects because they saw them as relevant to the world around them. Several of them viewed their studies in terms of how relevant they would be to their careers. One expressed the view that physics would be far more relevant to his future career because he wanted to be a chemical engineer; another student questioned the worth of English as a career option.

When asked about their feelings towards English, and writing in particular, some of the students expressed a problem with using their feelings within their work. They preferred the objective, detached side of science – being able to look at the surrounding world, rather than the personal, intimate side of English, which focuses on the individual. All the students showed a dislike of essay, discursive or lengthy pieces, although many talked about how often they wrote long pieces to ensure that they had covered all the correct points, thus also revealing a concern they had with achieving and succeeding.

How did the professional writer structure the students’ writing tasks?

The teachers discussed with the professional writer the strategies they wanted him to use with the students. These included structuring writing and making it seem as mathematical as possible. The writer explained writing in terms of ‘Here are some things to experiment with … later you could use this as a formula for your writing’. He also talked of ‘breaking down a task, like the way you would write up an experiment in physics’ and referred to writing as a ‘process’.

The writer started the ‘experiment’ on the coach journey to France. He set the students the task of listening out for, and writing down, interesting snatches of conversation which they overheard. He also asked them to make a list of interesting names they came across, and to observe and make notes about three interesting characters they encountered. Finally, he asked them to record three memorable views from the coach window. Later on, the students were expected to make use of their recorded snippets when writing a TV drama.

Another day, the students spent a morning at a cheese factory. The writer set up the writing task in advance, by instructing them to use their senses and record any interesting sights, smells, taste and sounds. After the visit he asked the students to write a list of 20 interesting words to describe their experience. He encouraged them to share the words with the rest of the group. He said that the students could ‘steal’ any effective words. He also encouraged them to write the words in alphabetical order, producing an alliterative effect. He explained how during the war, French women offered cheese to English soldiers as a token of their love.

What effect did the writer’s approach have on the students?

The TV drama-writing task seemed to help the students to relax because they had already done much of the work – they already had character names, interesting character details and a setting they could use. The task demonstrated to the students a new method of how to approach the writing task and helped them to see it as tightly structured, instead of open-ended. It also enabled them to incorporate the world around them. The students were enthusiastic about the task because it felt relevant to them.

The strategy of teaching poetry, combining a scientific process with a romantic story was effective at getting the boys to use their emotions. All of them seemed to manage this effortlessly, and some exceptionally. For example:

‘In the caves they hid, waiting for the mademoiselles to come bearing gifts…A soft heart of hay and hard work are the ingredients for well matured love’.

The teachers concluded that it was the students’ mindset, rather than lack of ability that had hindered their performance previously. The enrichment activities helped to change their attitudes and improve their performance.

Reference

Darley, H. & McGoldrick, A. (2006) Bridging the gap: Bigging up boys’ writing. The National Academy for Gifted and talented Youth. Available from: www.nagty.ac.uk/research/practitioner_research/developing_expertise_awards_05_06.aspx

We chose this case study because it shows how students were motivated by the learning opportunities created through enrichment activities. The teacher-researcher set out to find out what students in her 11–18 high school gained from attending the extra curricular science activities. The enrichment activities included:

• visits to local universities for lectures, demonstrations and activities
• visits to local science centres to work alongside local industry
• residential courses held at universities nationally
• entry into national science competitions
• a chemistry club, and
• a science lecture held at the school.

Altogether, 430 students from Year 7 to Year 12 were involved in science enhancement events. Feedback gained through questionnaires completed by 230 students and interviews with 18 gifted students revealed that the students benefited from the activities in terms of:

• increased challenge
• increased opportunities for active learning
• opportunities for meeting good role models
• seeing the real life relevance of science
• raised awareness of career options.

Increased challenge

The gifted and talented students contrasted the kind of practical work they experienced at school with the practical work they experienced out of school. They complained that school experiments were often uninteresting because they were too predictable. For example, a group of Year 10 gifted and talented students highlighted how they had done the same thermal insulating investigation, for which they needed to find the insulator that would keep water hot for the longest, for three consecutive years, so they already knew exactly which the best type of insulator was.

By contrast, some Year 8 gifted and talented students commented on how much they had enjoyed a science enrichment event at a local university where they had been given a mystery to solve that involved using chromatography and chemical tests to identify salts that had been found in a footprint. One boy stated how he had particularly enjoyed the activity because they had worked on the problem with no guidance at all from the teacher. Instead, they had followed instructions from a booklet. He said how he disliked practical science lessons where they were shown what to do by the teacher first because he knew what would happen before he started.

Increased opportunities for active learning

A common thread running through many of the gifted and talented students’ responses was that the extra curricular activities allowed more ‘hands on’ practical experience than much classroom science and this had helped to create more positive attitudes towards the subject. For example, one event organised for Year 10 gifted students was a visit to an interactive physics workshop held at a local university during science week. At the session, students designed insulators for high voltage electrical circuits and saw demonstrations involving high voltages and sparks. The students made clear their enjoyment of these kinds of activities:

‘I enjoyed making something we had personally designed (insulators) and then testing them to see if they worked and how much voltage they could withstand’.

Role models

Attending conferences, such as the ‘Express Yourself Conferences’, in which students presented findings of their own research at regional and national venues, gave them the opportunity to meet and work with science researchers who were carrying out PhD studies in many specialist areas of science. Their positive influence on the students was due to the fact the students viewed them as young, trendy role models who had credibility – ‘real’ scientists carrying out important work in the areas of medicine, sport science and cosmology etc. After attending such conferences, gifted and talented students could better identify how the science they were studying in school could be developed further and studied at a much higher level.

Seeing the real life relevance of science

Some university events helped the gifted and talented students see the relevance of science to their everyday lives and how what they learned could have practical applications. For example, at one event, the gifted and talented students were given the opportunity to design and test their own insulators. They compared this experience with a maths trip they had also been on in which they designed, built and tested a tent and its ability to keep you dry. They suggested that the relevance added extra interest in the problem and increased their desire to solve it.

Raised awareness of careers

Some of the Year 10 gifted and talented girls discussed a trip to a local university event they had been taken on whilst in Year 9. The aim of this event had been to encourage girls into science, technology and engineering careers – occupations traditionally dominated by men. They described with enthusiasm a real problem they had been asked to solve relating to a terrorist attack on a local shopping centre. They described the event as ‘really funny’ and ‘enjoyable’ although one student stated that perhaps students should have been asked before the event whether they were interested in engineering, because she wasn’t. Whilst she had enjoyed the day, it had not encouraged her to enter the world of engineering. However, her friend pointed out that if only the people interested in engineering were sent on the trip, there would be no point to it, as no new interest would be generated. Another gifted and talented girl stated that both that trip and the physics trip had increased her interest in studying either engineering or physics at university.

Reference

Heaton, A. (2006) ‘Making science sexy’: raising the profile of science for gifted and talented students. The National Academy for Gifted and talented Youth. Available from: www.nagty.ac.uk/research/practitioner_research/developing_expertise_awards_05_06.aspx

We chose this case study because it explores some of the pros and cons of accelerating the curriculum for gifted and talented students, as seen by the students themselves as well as their teachers.

Interviews with gifted and talented students at Key Stage 3 revealed they shared the same feelings of boredom and repetitiveness that are often reported in the research literature. The students were fast–tracked at Key Stage 3 – taking their Standard Assessment Tests (SATs) in Year 8 (rather than Year 9) and then continuing to GCSE courses a year early. The teacher–researcher then explored the views of staff and gifted and talented students about the effects of accelerating the curriculum at her boys’ grammar school. 

The study found that accelerating the curriculum was an effective way of motivating and extending the gifted and talented students within the school, although some students appeared to lack the maturity to deal with some of the intricacies of the GCSE specifications.

What were the students’ views of acceleration?

All the students were positive about the accelerated curriculum. They viewed it as a challenge, but thought they could cope, and felt motivated by it. They commented for example:

‘It has been hard work – it is quicker and harder and it has been interesting to see how some of us are struggling by doing it earlier than normal’.

‘There is a bit of pressure this year – but not an immense amount’.

‘It has been more interesting because it has been taught over a shorter period’.

‘I have always been told that Year 8 was …  just a waste of time … it is quite nice to have the work speeded up’.

‘Because I knew I had to do everything much quicker, I felt I had to work hard’.

However, some of the students pointed out that they could find ways of making work that was presented at a slower pace interesting:

‘It doesn’t matter if the work is easy – I just find that sometimes if it is too easy, I can add to this and I can do something that they aren’t expecting. So for example, in music, if I find the piece is easy I will think how I could add to it or how I could improve it’.

What were the teachers’ views of acceleration?

Teachers were generally positive about their experiences of acceleration, although English teachers expressed some concerns. Mathematics staff felt that it enabled the students to make the transition between GCSE and A level more successfully. After the students completed GCSE maths in Year 10, they continued with the subject in year 11 and took a free standing mathematics qualification worth 60 UCAS points which provided them with a taste of A level mathematics.

An English teacher felt that some of the boys would have benefited from the extra year’s maturity to develop some subtlety in their interpretations, especially with complex concepts such as Lady Macbeth’s character development:

‘They got the basics well but without sophistication in most cases’.

Another English teacher made a similar comment:

‘The Year 8 students struggled longer to get their heads round the Shakespeare play. I spent a lot of time explaining the plot, more than with Year 9, so there was not as much time available for analysis of the play’.

A further teacher commented:

‘Now I am teaching a top set Year 9 for GCSE English, it is easy for me to think that yes, they can cope. I do have a high number of able boys in this group. But I also have a number who feel a bit out of their depth’.

Although the students were motivated by their experience of an accelerated curriculum, staff noted how it also created a potential problem for them. As the Year 7 and 8 work was much easier, the students found it much easier to pick up if they had missed a lesson, whereas with the GCSE courses, they couldn’t rely on their own knowledge and intelligence and they often needed the help and support of staff – something they had not had to deal with before.

Brooks, A. (2006) The impact of an accelerated curriculum on gifted and talented students at KS3. The National Academy for Gifted and talented Youth. Available from: www.nagty.ac.uk/research/practitioner_research/developing_expertise_awards_05_06.aspx

The main study suggested that gifted and talented students benefit little from group work. Evidence from recent research on group work (such as research by Neil Mercer and Rupert Wegerif and colleagues which we reported in our Raising achievement through group work RoM) suggests that to help pupils get the most from working collaboratively, group work needs to be structured by the teacher. We present here two vignettes that illustrate different ways this can be achieved. The first shows how a group of teachers went about structuring group work to create effective discussion between students. The second focuses on one specific kind of structured activity for collaborative work and how teachers skilfully used the activity to develop all their students’ thinking.

Exploring strategies for structuring effective group work

Mathematics staff at an 11–16 comprehensive school used a research lesson study protocol to explore strategies for making group work effective. Whilst the class teacher taught the lesson, two colleagues observed and made audio and video recordings of the discussions that took place between the students. The students were also asked to complete questionnaires. Afterwards, the staff met together to analyse the data they had collected and used the information to plan further lessons designed to address the issues that had been revealed.

One set of lessons progressed in the following sequence:

• unstructured group work – for the first lesson in the series, the teacher simply put the students into groups and asked them to work together on an investigation. When they analysed audio and video recordings of the lesson, the staff found that most of the students’ talk was ‘cumulative’ – that is, they simply agreed with what each other said. Some of the pupils’ talk was ‘disputational’ – they argued unproductively, did not listen to what each other said and reached their own decisions, rather than make them jointly. The staff found little evidence of ‘exploratory’ talk, the most educationally effective kind of talk, which involves students explaining and justifying their ideas before reaching an agreement.
• establishing ground rules – to encourage more exploratory talk, the teacher started the second lesson with a class discussion about working in groups. The class devised some ground rules for working in groups, for example ‘give reasons to back up anything you say’. The teacher also restructured the groups so that the students worked with others of the same gender and ability.
• providing discussion rich activities – in the third lesson of the set, the teacher arranged the students into single-sex, similar ability friendship groups as before and reminded the students of the ground rules for group work. The teacher then gave the students ‘discussion rich’ problems. All values in the problems had been replaced by nonsense words. For example: ‘Sam has baba packets of sweets. Each packet has gaga sweets in it. Sam gives away nana sweets from each pack, then he eats a total of lala sweets himself. How many sweets does he have left?’

How did the strategies affect student learning?

The teachers found that when the group work was structured, the students felt more confident about solving mathematical problems. They also found that arranging the students into groupings based on their gender, ability or level of communication skill helped to encourage greater collaboration and constructive talk. 

Reference

Seal, C. (2006) How can we encourage pupil dialogue in collaborative group work? National Teacher Research Panel summary.  Available at: www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/ntrp/conference/summaries06

Using geography mysteries to develop pupil learning

In this example, teachers used ‘mysteries’ to diagnose their pupils’ thinking so that they could provide a next step that would move their thinking forwards.  The first aim of the study was to identify differences in the ways that high and low achieving groups of pupils tackled the mysteries.  It found that groups progressed through a series of observable stages of thinking. The second aim of the study was to see how teachers used their knowledge of these stages of thinking to scaffold pupil learning. 

What are mysteries?

Groups of two to four pupils are presented with 15–30 pieces of information on a topic (for example, hurricanes or earthquakes etc) with each piece of information provided on a separate slip of paper (the data items). The information includes trigger and background factors.  The group is also given a question to answer.  For example: There was an elderly couple living in Kobe, Mr and Mrs Endo.  One of them died in the earthquake disaster – which one and why?

What stages were involved in tackling mysteries?

Five progressive stages of thinking were identified by the study:

• the display stage – simply spreading out the data items on the table so that they could all be seen and read easily
• the setting stage – organising the data items into sets with common characteristics, usually arranged as columns or blocks
• the sequencing and webbing stage – identifying relationships between the sets or between single items
• the reworking stage – the establishment of new sets of relationships between the sets or between single items
• the abstract stage – the physical manipulation of the data items ceased, but the discussion continued.

Low achieving group

A low achieving group of twelve year old boys were doing a mystery which concerned he disappearance of a tribe of Amazonian Indians. The slips of paper included information about:

• gold prospectors
• water pollution
• infectious diseases
• hunting practices
• poverty among the non-Indian population etc.

The group was having great difficulty with the mystery. The teacher visited them and pulled out a data item about the tribe’s water supply.  She then asked them to find any other data items about water and left them to work alone.  With this action, the teacher had diagnosed a weakness shared by the whole group in classifying/grouping data and demonstrated how they could undertake the next stage in working towards a solution.  When the pupils had grouped several data items about water, the teacher returned to suggest that they might form a group about diseases and health. This enabled her on a third visit to start asking them about the possible connections both within and between the two groups of data items. The pupils thus took their first steps on formulating an explanation. 

High achieving group

A group of 14–15 year old girls of higher ability were doing a mystery that focused on who was to blame for the need to demolish a block of (public housing) flats in a British city.  The data items included reference to:

• the faulty materials and technology used in the building
• the anti–social behaviour of some of the residents
• the destruction of the community which lived in the terraced houses that were cleared to build the high–rise blocks
• the physical deterioration of the building
• the fears of residents in the flats with young children. 

The girls had initially sorted their data into two groups: one representing reasons for the demolition and the other against.  But in fact, they were not addressing the task and were classifying in an unproductive way.  When their teacher pointed this out to them, they began to re-sort the data bearing in mind the need to attribute blame or reasons.  This time they formed groups related to the local council, the builders, the anti–social residents and the government.

Reference

Leat, D. & Nichols, A. (2000) 'Observing pupils’ mental strategies: signposts for scaffolding.' International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education 9 (1) pp.19–35 [Online] Available at: www.multilingual-matters.net/irgee/009/irgee0090019.htm